Method for localizing execution or subqueries and determining collocation of execution of subqueries in a parallel database

ABSTRACT

A method for localizing execution of subqueries and determining collocation of execution of subqueries in a shared-nothing database. The concept of compatible partitioning is used to localize database operations in order to eliminate excess processes and communication, and thereby improve response time and throughput for the database management system. The method reduces the number of process by reducing the number of nodes involved in processing a query and by combining multiple processes.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

This invention relates to parallel-processor database systems and moreparticularly to a method for localizing execution and determiningcollocation of execution of subqueries in a parallel database.

DESCRIPTION OF THE RELATED ART

A typical parallel processor computer system has a number of resourcessuch as processors, memory buffers and the like. These resources canoperate simultaneously, thereby greatly improving the performance of thecomputer when executing a task which has a number of sub-tasks that canbe executed independently of each other.

Executing a sub-task usually involves executing a number of sub-taskseach of which in turn may have several parts. In a computer having onlyone processor, each step in executing each part of the sub-task isperformed sequentially. In a parallel processor computer, several suchoperations can be performed simultaneously, but typically the parallelcomputer system does not have enough resources to go around. Resolvingconflicting demands by the various sub-tasks for access to suchresources has been a problem in the design of parallel processorcomputer systems, especially in the context of using such computersystems to evaluate complicated queries of a database.

Various kinds of parallel-processor database computer architectures havebeen proposed. Most of the proposed architectures for parallel-processorcomputers use a “shared-nothing” approach. A shared-nothing architecturecomprises a collection of independent processors each having its ownmemory and disk and connected to the other processors via a high-speedcommunication network. In a shared-nothing database architecture,communication and synchronization overhead are critical factors inoverall query performance. Shared-nothing systems are particularlywell-suited to evaluate queries that can be partitioned into independentsub-problems, each of which is executed in parallel with the others.

There is a continuing need for a way to optimize query execution in ashared-nothing computer so as to make the most effective use of thevarious resources of the computer.

In shared-nothing database systems, the concept of “compatiblepartitioning” to localize database operations is a known technique tominimize inter-processor communication. For example, by partitioningtables t1 and t2 on t1.a and t2.a respectively, all communication can beavoided in computation of the JOIN “t1.a=t2.a”. This result followssince a partition of t1 will only join with a partition of t2 on thesame node.

There still remains a need for an efficient way to optimize subqueriesin a multi-processor or parallel computer system, and particularly in a“shared-nothing” computer system.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention provides a method for localizing execution anddetermining collocation of execution of subqueries in a paralleldatabase. The method according to the present invention is suitable forboth subqueries that involve correlation and subqueries that do not.

The method according to the present invention reduces the systemresources needed for processing a query by reducing the number ofprocesses used when a partitioning key of any table involved in thequery is specified by an equality to a constant, host-variable, IN-list,or any internal run-time computation. The method reduces the number ofprocesses: (1) by reducing the number of nodes involved in the query; or(2) by combining multiple processes into one.

The method according to the present invention also uses the concept of“compatible partitioning” in shared-nothing database systems toeliminate excess processing and communication for subqueries therebyimproving response time and throughput.

In a first aspect, the present invention provides a method fordetermining locality for execution of subqueries for queries in arelational database management system, wherein said queries comprise anouter query and a subquery having a query-subquery operator and whereinpartitioning columns for the query and subquery are provided, saidmethod comprising the steps of: (a) determining if said outer query andsaid subquery are compatibly partitioned; (b) if said outer query andsaid subquery are compatibly partitioned then for each pair ofpartitioning columns in said outer query and said subquery determiningan equivalence class for each of said columns in said pair; (c)determining if the partitioning column for said subquery belongs to thesame equivalence class as the partitioning column for said outer query;(d) determining if said query-subquery operator comprises a selectedoperator; and and (e) if said steps (c) and (d) are true, thendetermining locality for said subquery so that said subquery isexecutable locally with respect to said outer query by the relationaldatabase management.

In a second aspect, the present invention provides a relational databasemanagement system for use with a computer system wherein queries areentered for retrieving data from tables and wherein partitioning columnsand partitioning keys are provided, said system comprising: means forprocessing nested queries comprising an outer query and a subquery;means for determining locality of execution of said subquery including,(a) means for determining if said outer query and said subquery arecompatibly partitioned; (b) means for determining an equivalence classfor each column forming a corresponding pair of partitioning columns forsaid outer query and said subquery; (c) means for ascertaining if thepartitioning column for said subquery belongs to the same equivalenceclass as the partitioning column for said outer query; (d) means fordetermining if said query-subquery operator comprises a selectedoperator; and (e) means responsive to said means for ascertaining andsaid means for determining said selected operator for determininglocality of said subquery so that said subquery is locally executablewith respect to said outer query by the relational database managementsystem.

In a third aspect, the present invention provides a computer programproduct for use on a computer wherein queries are entered for retrievingdata from tables, wherein said queries comprise an outer query and asubquery having a query-subquery operator and wherein partitioningcolumns for the query and subquery are provided, said computer programproduct comprising: a recording medium; means recorded on said mediumfor instructing said computer to perform the steps of, (a) determiningif said outer query and said subquery are compatibly partitioned; (b) ifsaid outer query and said subquery are compatibly partitioned then foreach pair of partitioning columns in said outer query and said subquerydetermining an equivalence class for each of said columns in said pair;(c) determining if the partitioning column for said subquery belongs tothe same equivalence class as the partitioning column for said outerquery; (d) determining if said query-subquery operator comprises aselected operator; and (e) if said steps (c) and (d) are true, thendetermining locality for said subquery so that said subquery is locallyexecutable with respect to said outer query by the relational databasemanagement.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

Reference will now be made, by way of example, to the accompanyingdrawing which shows a preferred embodiment of the present invention, andin which:

The FIGURE is a flow chart of a method for determining locality forexecution of subqueries according to the present invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT

A database management system (DBMS) is a system for accepting commandsto store, retrieve, and delete data. A widely used and well known set ofcommands for use with DBMS is the Structured Query Language (SQL). Asimple example of a SQL query is:

EXAMPLE 1:

SELECT column x

FROM table t1

WHERE column y=‘employee’

The query shown in Example 1 requests that the DBMS retrieve all columnx fields from tuples in table t1 which have column y equal to‘employee’. In practical applications, the query can become quitecomplex. Multiple tables and multiple columns can be referenced. (Inorder to distinguish which column of which table is being referencedcolumn x of table t1 may be written as t1.x).

One of the most powerful features of SQL is the capability of nestingSQL query expressions within the predicate in the WHERE clause. NestedSQL queries are called subqueries. With subqueries, one can compare thecolumn expression of a query to the column expression of another query.One can also compare column expressions with subqueries whose result isa table, either by testing membership, testing if ANY row of the tablehas a property, or testing if ALL do. Often a query is formulated byusing a subquery in the predicate. For example, to find all theemployees who earn more than the average salary of the entireorganization, one may write:

EXAMPLE 2:

SELECT name FROM employee e

WHERE salary>(SELECT avg(salary) FROM employee e1)

The query shown in Example 2 illustrates a non-correlated subquery. Anexample of a correlated subquery is provided below in Example 3.

EXAMPLE 3:

SELECT name FROM employee e

WHERE salary>(SELECT avg(salary) FROM employee e1 WHERE e1.dept=e.dept)

The query shown in Example 3 determines the names of employees who earnmore than the average salary of their department.

The implementation of a subquery according to the art involves settingup processes to evaluate the subqueries, e.g. “SELECT avg(salary) . . .”, and setting up communication paths between the subquery processes andthe outer query, e.g. “SELECT name FROM employee e WHERE> . . . ”. Theresult of a query (and subquery) execution is a table, and thecommunication path is needed for the subquery result. For correlatedsubqueries, an additional path is needed in order to send the correlatedvalues. An example of a correlated subquery is “SELECT avg(salary) FROMemployee e1 WHERE e1.dept=e.dept” . . . as shown above in Example 3.

The method according to the present invention utilizes compatiblepartitioning to localize database operations for subqueries. The methodleads to fewer processes and less communication. The fewer processesease the demand on system resources, and less communication improvesresponse time and throughput for the DBMS.

Reference is made to the accompanying FIGURE which shows in flow chartform an overview of a method 10 according to the present invention. Thepresent invention is described with reference to a shared-nothingdatabase, however, the invention has wider applicability to otherparallel database architectures.

An SQL command comprising an outer query and a subquery is entered toretrieve information from a database. The command is processed by thedatabase management system (DBMS) on a database processing machine. Inknown manner, the command statement is parsed and the semantics of thestatement are checked for compliance with grammatical/semantic rules,and then an internal representation of the command is made for thesystem to process the command. In one form of the invention, a method isprovided to determine if the subquery can be executed locally withrespect to the outer query, in order to improve the processing of thequery for retrieving data quickly. Improvements relate to improvedresponse time and throughput by reducing system resources needed forexecution of query and communication paths (between the subquery and theouter query). For a subquery executed locally according to the method ofthe present invention, the result of the subquery execution will havethe same partitioning as both the input outer query and the inputsubquery. An additional improvement is achieved because the method maybe recursively applied to other query-subquery tuples.

A first step 12 in the method 10 involves determining if the outer queryand the inner query are “compatibly partitioned”. According to step 12of the method, the outer query and inner query are compatiblypartitioned if they use the same “Partitioning Algorithm”. APartitioning Algorithm is an algorithm which unambiguously identifies asingle partition by considering only the column values of a given row ina table. The smallest subset of such column values is known as the“Partitioning Key” of the table, and the columns in the subset are knownas the “Partitioning Columns” of the table. If a Partitioning Algorithmexists for a table, then the table is “Deterministically Partitioned”.(The result of a query execution (and a subquery execution) is a table.)If a Partitioning Algorithm does not exist for a table, then the tableis not Deterministically Partitioned. Query and subquery partitioningaccording to the method of the present invention involves consideringthe Partitioning Algorithm, i.e. Partitioning Columns, for the resultingtables.

In other words, compatible partitioning means that any matching tuple oft1 (i.e. resulting table for the executed query) on the clause t1.a=t2.awill occur on the same node as the tuple of t2 (i.e. the resulting tablefor the executed subquery). The utilization of compatible partitioningaccording to the present method is shown by the following example.

EXAMPLE 4:

If tables t1 and t2 are partitioned on t1.a and t2.a respectively, thenthe subquery.col

SELECT * FROM t1

WHERE t1.a IN

(SELECT a FROM t2)

can be evaluated by comparing t1.a with only the t2.b values on thatnode.

If the outer query and the subquery are compatibly partitioned, i.e.they utilize the same Partitioning Algorithm, then the method 10proceeds next to steps 14 and 16 to determine if the subquery is locallyexecutable.

In steps 14 and 16, the method 10 determines if each corresponding pairof Partitioning Columns satisfies two conditions. (In the followingdescription, a corresponding pair of Partitioning Columns refers tocolumns which correspond to the order of Partitioning Columns accordingto the partitioning keys of the outer query and the subquery.) The firstcondition is tested in step 14 and involves determining if both columnsin the pair belong to the same Query-Subquery (QS) Equivalence Class.The second condition is tested in step 16 and involves determining ifthe Query-Subquery (QS) operator comprises one of the four operators:“=ANY, ⋄ALL, NOT IN or IN”. If the outer query and subquery arecompatibly partitioned (step 12) and the two conditions (step 14 and 16)are satisfied, then according to the method of the present invention thesubquery is processed or evaluated by the DBMS entirely locally in step20 with respect to the outer query.

For step 14 of the method, the QS Equivalence Class is the list ofcolumns each of which belong to any of the base tables (or derivedtables) belonging to the Query-Subquery. Two columns c1,c2 belong to thesame QS Equivalence Class, if there exists a Boolean Factor c1=c2 ineither the query predicate or the subquery predicate. The methodaccording to the present invention uses the column equivalence class toestablish a one-to-one pairing between the partitioning columns of thequery and the partitioning columns of the subquery. If there is aone-to-one pairing, then the subquery is executable locally with respectto the outer query as shown in step 20.

The method is also suitable for cases where the order of partitioningcolumns in the partitioning key is not significant. In such a case, themethod may consider more partitioning columns of the subquery forpairing with a single partitioning column of the outer query and viceversa. To guarantee locality of execution of the subquery with respectto the outer query, the method needs to establish any one-to-one pairingbetween the partitioning columns of the outer query and the partitioningcolumns of the subquery, where each pair satisfies the two conditions.

The second condition applied in step 16 of the method 10 involvesdetermining if the outer query's column participates in a query-subquerypredicate and the subquery's column participates in the SELECT list ofthe subquery in such a form, that only the equal values of the twocolumns need to be investigated to conclude validity of the predicate.In the case of a query-subquery which does not comprise a QS operator ofthe four “=ANY, ⋄ALL, NOT IN or IN”, it is still possible to execute thesubquery locally if uniqueness in the subquery result can be guaranteed.As shown in the FIGURE, if the second condition in step 16 is notsatisfied, i.e. the QS operator does not comprise=ANY, ⋄ALL, NOT IN orIN, the method 10 moves to step 18. In step 18, the method 10 checks ifthe QS operator is “=” and then determines if the locality of thesubquery result can be guaranteed. If the outcome of step 18 is TRUE,then according to the invention the subquery is locally executable instep 20. One method for determining uniqueness is by considering if anyunique key on the subquery result (i.e. table) is specified by equalityto a constant, hostvar or other construct. The operation of this aspectof the method is shown by the following example:

EXAMPLE 5:

SELECT * FROM t1

WHERE a=(SELECT a FROM t2 WHERE t2.c=300)

Given t2.c is a unique key on table t2

According to the present method, the unique key t2.c is recognized asguaranteeing the uniqueness of the subquery result and therefore thesubquery is executed locally with respect to the outer query. On theother hand, if the “elect list” for the subquery is not a simple columnor constant, for example SELECT * FROM t1 WHERE a IN (SELECT avg(b) FROMt2), the method cannot guarantee uniqueness of the subquery result andtherefore the subquery is not executed locally.

The operation of the method 10 according to the present invention isillustrated for a non-correlated subquery. A non-correlated subquery isevaluated entirely locally if the following conditions are satisfied:(1) the QS operand and the subquery result are “compatibly partitioned”and belong to the same equivalence class; and (2) the QS operator is oneof four=ANY, ⋄ALL, NOT IN or IN. The method determines compatiblepartitioning (step 12 in the FIGURE) using a test similar to that usedfor determining compatibly partitioning for joins, e.g. T1.a=T2.a. Thefollowing example illustrates a non-correlated subquery.

EXAMPLE 6:

SELECT * FROM t1.a

WHERE t1.a IN (SELECT a FROM t2)

and given t1 and t2 are partitioned on t1.a and t2.a

For a non-correlated subquery, the method first determines if the QSoperand, i.e. t1.a, and the subquery result, i.e. SELECT a from t2, arecompatibly partitioned (step 12 in the FIGURE). The next step in themethod involves determining if the QS operand is=ANY, ⋄ANY, NOT IN or IN(step 16 in the FIGURE). Given that t1 and t2 are partitioned on t1.aand t2.a and the QS operand is “IN”, then according to the method 10 thesubquery is evaluated locally by comparing the t1.a value with only thet2.b values on that node. Evaluating the subquery locally improves theresponse time and throughput for the DBMS because fewer system resourcesand communication are needed.

The method is also suitable for subquery having more than one tableprovided the subquery result is compatibly partitioned with the QSoperand. For example, the following subquery includes another table t3which is partitioned on t3.a:

EXAMPLE 7:

SELECT * FROM t1

WHERE t1.a ⋄ALL

(SELECT t2.a FROM t2,t3 WHERE t2.a=t3.a)

According to the method, the subquery in Example 7 is evaluated fullylocally.

The operation of the method according to the present invention for acorrelated subquery is shown for the following example query.

EXAMPLE 8:

SELECT * FROM t1

WHERE a IN (SELECT b FROM t2 WHERE t2.a=t1.a)

The method first checks the correlation values connecting the outerquery block to the subquery block. For the query of Example 8, thesubquery block has a correlation value of t1.a and the method determinesthat because of the correlation value, i.e. t1.a, for the subquery, thevalues of the outer query, i.e. SELECT * FROM t1, will only match thosevalues of t2.b which come from the same node. Therefore, according tothe method the subquery block is executable locally.

If the correlation values do not guarantee locality, then the methodproceeds as described above for a non-correlated subquery, i.e. themethod connects the QS operand, IN, NOT IN,=ANY or ⋄ALL predicate, withthe subquery result. The operation of this aspect of the present methodis shown by the following example:

EXAMPLE 9:

SELECT * FROM t1

WHERE a IN (SELECT a FROM t2 WHERE t2.b=t1.a)

In the above example, the method determines if the correlation value,i.e. t1.a, for the subquery block guarantees locality. For this example,the correlation value t1.a does not guarantee locality, i.e. matcheswill not all come from the same node, and the method proceeds as for anon-correlated subquery described above. According to the method of thepresent invention, the QS predicate, i.e. IN, NOT IN, ⋄ANY,=ANY,guarantees locality and the subquery is executable locally with respectto the outer query.

It is another feature of the present method that if the subquery can beexecuted locally with respect to the outer query, then the result of theexecution and application of the subquery produces a new query with thesame partitioning as both the original outer query and the subquery.This means that the steps described above can be applied recursively toother query-subquery tuples.

The present invention may be embodied in other specific forms withoutdeparting from the spirit or essential characteristics thereof.Therefore, the presently discussed embodiments are considered to beillustrative and not restrictive, the scope of the invention beingindicated by the appended claims rather than the foregoing description,and all changes which come within the meaning and range of equivalencyof the claims are therefore intended to be embraced therein.

We claim:
 1. A method for determining locality for execution ofsubqueries for queries in a relational database management system,wherein said queries comprise an outer query and a subquery having aquery-subquery operator and wherein partitioning columns for the queryand subquery are provided, said method comprising the steps of: (a)determining if said outer query and said subquery are compatiblypartitioned; (b) if said outer query and said subquery are compatiblypartitioned then for each pair of partitioning columns in said outerquery and said subquery determining an equivalence class for each ofsaid columns in said pair; (c) determining if the partitioning columnfor said subquery belongs to the same equivalence class as thepartitioning column for said outer query; (d) determining if saidquery-subquery operator comprises a selected operator; and (e) if saidsteps (c) and (d) are true, determining locality for said subquery sothat said subquery is locally executable with respect to said outerquery by the relational database management.
 2. The method as claimed inclaim 1, wherein said step (d) comprises checking if said selectedoperator is the=operator and determining if a correlation valueconnecting said outer query to said subquery guarantees localizedexecution of the said subquery with respect to said outer query.
 3. Themethod as claimed in claim 2, wherein said step (c) comprisesdetermining if a column for said outer query will match on values of acolumn for said subquery and which come from a same node.
 4. The methodas claimed in claim 1, wherein said selected operator belongs to a groupof operators comprising=ANY, ⋄ALL, NOT IN or IN.
 5. The method asclaimed in claim 1, wherein said step (c) comprises determining if apartitioning key for said subquery is specified by a construct.
 6. Themethod as claimed in claim 4, wherein said construct comprises aconstant.
 7. The method as claimed in claim 4, wherein said constructcomprises a HOSTVAR.
 8. A method for determining locality for executionof subqueries in queries in a relational database management system,wherein said queries comprise an outer query and a subquery having aquery-subquery operator and wherein partitioning columns for the queryand subquery are provided, said method comprising the steps of: (a)determining if said outer query and said subquery are compatiblypartitioned; (b) if said outer query and said subquery are compatiblypartitioned then for each pair of partitioning columns in said outerquery and said subquery determining an equivalence class for each ofsaid columns in said pair; (c) determining if the partitioning columnfor said subquery belongs to the same equivalence class as thepartitioning column for said outer query; (d) determining if saidquery-subquery operator belongs to a group of operators comprising=ANY,⋄ALL, NOT IN or IN; and (e) if said steps (c) and (d) are true, thenconcluding locality for execution of said subquery so that said subqueryis executable locally with respect to said outer query by the relationaldatabase management system.
 9. A relational database management systemfor use with a computer system wherein queries are entered forretrieving data from tables and wherein partitioning columns andpartitioning keys are provided, said system comprising: means forprocessing nested queries comprising an outer query and a subquery;means for determining locality of execution of said subquery including,(a) means for determining if said outer query and said subquery arecompatibly partitioned; (b) means for determining an equivalence classfor each column forming a corresponding pair of partitioning columns forsaid outer query and said subquery; (c) means for ascertaining if thepartitioning column for said subquery belongs to the same equivalenceclass as the partitioning column for said outer query; (d) means fordetermining if said query-subquery operator comprises a selectedoperator; and (e) means responsive to said means for ascertaining andsaid means for determining said selected operator for determininglocality of said subquery so that said subquery is locally executablewith respect to said outer query by the relational database managementsystem.
 10. The system as claimed in claim 9, wherein said means fordetermining said query-subquery is responsive to a query-subqueryoperator belonging to a group of operators comprising=ANY, ⋄ALL, NOT INor IN.
 11. A computer program product for use on a computer whereinqueries are entered for retrieving data from tables, wherein saidqueries comprise an outer query and a subquery having a query-subqueryoperator and wherein partitioning columns for the query and subquery areprovided, said computer program product comprising: a recording medium;means recorded on said medium for instructing said computer to performthe steps of, (a) determining if said outer query and said subquery arecompatibly partitioned; (b) if said outer query and said subquery arecompatibly partitioned then for each pair of partitioning columns insaid outer query and said subquery determining an equivalence class foreach of said columns in said pair; (c) determining if the partitioningcolumn for said subquery belongs to the same equivalence class as thepartitioning column for said outer query; (d) determining if saidquery-subquery operator comprises a selected operator; and (e) if saidsteps (c) and (d) are true, then determining locality for said subqueryso that said subquery is locally executable with respect to said outerquery by the relational database management.
 12. The computer programproduct as claimed in claim 11, wherein step (d) comprises determiningif a correlation value connecting said outer query to said subqueryguarantees localized execution of said subquery with respect to saidouter query.
 13. The computer program product as claimed in claim 11,wherein said selected operator belongs to a group of operatorscomprising=ANY, ⋄ALL, NOT IN or IN.